Epa-Rtp Facilities Waste Reduction Assessment

EPA-RTP FACILITIES WASTE REDUCTION ASSESSMENT

PURPOSE:

The WRRC conducted a Waste Stream Audit of EPA-RTP Activities on August 30 – September 2, 1999. The Audit was conducted pursuant to William Laxton’s Memorandum of August 24, 1999 to help develop a program for the new EPA facility in RTP. A walk through assessment of waste generating activities at 10 facilities was conducted to accomplish the following:

·  Identify waste.

·  Quantify volumes generated.

·  Verify current waste recycling, reuse and disposal practices.

·  Identify additional waste streams not currently targeted for recycling, reuse, energy generation, etc.

·  Identify waste reduction alternatives and optimized waste handling opportunities for the new facility.

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS:

EPA’s RTP facilities are expected to comply with the provisions of Executive Orders governing federal facilities. Provisions of two Executive Orders address pollution prevention, waste reduction, energy, and water conservation and other environmental issues. The following paragraphs provide excerpts of two that address findings in this report and establish minimum waste reduction goals and standards for future operations.

Executive Order 13101: Greening The Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling and Federal Acquisition dated September 14, 1998 (attached).

·  Establishes waste prevention and recycling goals for daily operations.

·  Establishes affirmative procurement goals to help create markets for recycled content materials. Goals applicable to this audit’s findings include wording that each agency shall establish minimum post consumer content of 30% for all categories of paper. If price and performance dictate, 20% post consumer content paper may be purchased. Effective January 1, 1999, the minimum standards established are applicable to all purchases.

·  Contracts for services within Federal Facilities are to include a requirement to comply with provisions of this order.

Executive Order 38561: Greening The Government Through Efficient Energy Management dated June 3, 1999 (attached).

Although outside the scope of this audit, the main thrust of EPA – RTP’s energy management practices should be at a minimum to insure that stipulated energy conservation goals, techniques, and practices are met by the new facility and when possible, exceeded. These include:

Page 2

·  Reduced energy consumption per gross square foot of 30% by 2005, and 35% by 2010 (Baseline 1985).

·  For lab facilities, reduce energy consumption by 20% by 2005 and 25 percent by 2010. (Baseline 1990).

·  Establishing water conservation practices and procedures compatible with GSA principles for the siting, design and construction of new facilities.

If appropriate, the LEED Green Building Rating System ™ 1.0 standard issued by the Green Building Council dated January 1999 could be used as an evaluation tool for systems, materials, and practices being installed and implemented in the new building (attached).

APPROACH: John Calcagni and Bob Carter of the Waste Reduction Resource Center accompanied by appropriate staff environmental members, conducted a waste audit of targeted EPA-RTP activities in the following order:

August 30 Emissions Monitoring Lab

Grand Slam Racquet Club

Catawba Building

NHEERL

August 31 Annex

Administration Building

Building 4201

NHEERL

Sept. 1 N. C. Mutual

Human Studies

Sept. 2 Environmental Research Center

The Audit was conducted in a manner to minimally interfere with on-going activities. Most personnel were aware of the scheduled audit. All encountered were very cooperative and expressed interest in handling and reducing waste properly at their location.

Waste generating and handling practices were observed at each location. Many personnel at individual sites were not aware of the ultimate fate of wastes collected at their site. Many, particularly at Chapel Hill and N. C. Mutual sites, were not aware of which wastes could be recycled through existing programs. Observations both general and specific will be discussed in succeeding sections.

Page 3

GENERAL DISCUSSION:

The Environmental Protection Agency must set the example in complying with environmental standards established for Federal Agencies. To do otherwise would compromise the Agency’s capability to enforce the environmental standards, rules and regulations it is charged with enforcing.

EPA-RTP has an opportunity to set the example for environmental stewardship in this area. Every effort should be made to instill an environmental protection ethic in all offices, labs, and other activities in the new facility. Efforts to generate this ethic should begin now in existing operations.

This assessment found significant variability in current waste reduction, waste avoidance and recycling practices at different locations. In most cases, all personnel contacted were interested in participating in the existing recycling program as they understood it to be. Knowledge of current opportunities varied. A re-education of all employees on the current recycling program would set the stage for program review and modification.

A significant effort needs to be initiated to reduce the large magnitude of files, records, excess materials, equipment, furniture, etc., as soon as possible. Guidelines need to be issued on the proper retention and disposal of records and documents dating from the 70’s and 80’s. Cataloging and broadcasting of excess materials and equipment for possible internal use and marketing or disposal should begin ASAP.

The ORD Health, Safety, and Environmental Management Office now manages future acquisition of hazardous chemicals. However, large quantities of chemicals and other hazardous materials were observed throughout the various labs and shops; many of which were dated as purchased in the 80’s. Expanded control of the purchase, storage and issue of chemicals and other hazardous materials is recommended to insure these materials are minimized. If feasible, a central order issuing and lifecycle monitoring and control using a bar coding system should be planned for the new facility. This computer based control and tracking process would provide the necessary tools to minimize this waste stream.

To maximize the effectiveness of the program and eliminate the need to “grandfather” old chemicals it should be started before moving to the new facility. Existing inventory should be bar-coded as a condition of transfer. It is recognized that laboratory chemicals, standards and cleaning agents are varied and generally issued in small volumes. However, there appears to be

reluctance to share chemicals among labs. The existing adoption programs for chemicals and glassware needs to be expanded, given greater prominence and “sold” to the staff. Efforts should be made to reduce quantities of chemicals stored in labs by such means as having the contractor custom formulate solutions when using chemicals used in low volume or have the contractor retain possession of the purchased reagent and limit what is dispensed to that necessary to complete the task. Any effort to standardize, reduce quantities used and insure life cycle control would be worthwhile.

Page 4

Executive Order 13101 encourages agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to retain funds from recycling materials. Presently, arrangements for transferring the recyclable materials to a wholesaler are designed to minimize the administrative burden rather than to realize any potential economic return. The recyclable materials are transferred to a recycler through an informal arrangement, which either party can cancel. The recycler agrees to haul, at no cost, all agreed upon recyclables sorted by the Agency. The advantages of this arrangement are the administrative simplicity of not having to bid and negotiate a formal contract, the elimination of the need to track or keep records on quantities transferred and the elimination of the need to transfer funds between parties. This approach minimizes the burden on the Agency and achieves

its primary interest of assuring that these materials are recycled rather than discarded. The limits of this approach are that it does little to encourage expansion to other materials (e.g. scrap metals, excessed laboratory glass, electronic components, etc.) or to recover any profits from the recycling of materials.

While most offices pay a premium to cover the costs of collecting recycling materials, for larger programs the proceeds from the sale of white paper, aluminum, cardboard, and scrap metal are often sufficient to more than offset the costs of collection of the less profitable materials such as mixed paper, plastic, and glass. Military installations often use proceeds from their recycling programs to supplement “local morale and welfare funds.” From the limited available records, we could not determine whether the quantity and mix of recyclable materials to be collected at the new building would be sufficient to support a profitable recycling program. However, we doubt the present recycler would continue the present arrangement if it was incurring a continuing loss. With the increased centralization of EPA facilities and possibility of consolidating recycled materials with NIEHS, there will likely be an increase in volume at the new site and the likelihood of profitability is greater.

We understand that in Washington, D.C., the Agency has an arrangement with the EPA Recreation Association where the association takes responsibility for the recyclables, serving as an intermediary between the Agency and the wholesaler rather than having the Agency deal directly with the wholesaler. Assuming interest by the RTP-EPA Recreation Association or another local EPA/NIEHS employee-based group, a similar arrangement at the new facility could result in tangible benefits to employees from recycling which could possibly encourage increased participation. It would also provide a focal point for exploring expanding the program into new areas without increasing the administrative burden on the Agency.

Subsequent to completion of the assessment, the Waste Assessment Team visited the NIEHS Building and reviewed their recycling program. Their program appears to be well conceived and functioning. While an in-depth review of their program is beyond the scope of this report, the potential for beneficial cooperation is real. For example, NIEHS is receiving revenue for recycling two waste streams that EPA-RTP is currently trashing (Pyrex and Tyvek). The potential for establishing a central Material Recycling Facility to receive, market, and dispose of excess and waste materials should be studied. Such a facility could serve both EPA-RTP and NIEHS. Joint marketing of these materials would provide greater revenue than two separate programs.

Page 5

SITE SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS:

Emissions Monitoring Lab

Waste Fate

Printer Copies Paper Excess Recycled

Virgin Xerox Paper in use.

Aluminum Cans Recycled by Vendor

Toner Cartridges Unknown

Note: The store room of this facility contained old records, publications, spill kits for acid/flammable/mercury/caustic materials clean up, etc. A continuing need for this material could not be determined.

Excess Property Warehouse: Both Government owned and contractor property is stored in this warehouse. Government owned property has been surplused by the original using activity. Excess property is disposed of in the following priority:

1.  Made available to local EPA onsite activities and other Federal Agencies. (Advertised on GSA List)

2.  Made available to local schools at no charge.

3.  Publically auctioned.

4.  Disposal

Waste Streams Fate

- Pallets 1. Reused

2.  Pay $2/pallet to remove

3.  Non recoverable trashed

- Scrap Metal Unknown

- Solid Waste Disposed of under contract (dumpster contained recyclable materials cardboard, pallets, metal, computer monitors, white paper, carpets, etc. Inside trashcan contained aluminum cans, white paper, plastic, etc).

- Toner Cartridges Accumulated from various activities and sold by

pallet via sealed bid.

Grand Slam Warehouse: The major activity in this building is the administrative supply storage and issuing activity. The old central printing shop is no longer in use. While most paper in

Page 6

storage had 20 – 30 % post consumer content, special use paper was virgin material (colored, covers, files, legal size three hole paper, etc.). According to the storeroom clerk, Xerox virgin copier paper observed in use at various locations is not stocked or purchased. While basically a storage and issuing activity, trashcans in the warehouse contained white paper, old permit forms, etc.

Catawba Building: This is a leased office complex. As with all office areas observed, collection sites for white paper and aluminum cans were provided. While several copier areas were

observed, the major user was the Central Printing Room which uses 15 to 50 cases of paper per month depending on user requests. Some Xerox virgin paper was present.

Wastes Fate

- White Paper Recycled. Most copies in individual recycling containers were single sided.

- Toner Cartridges Replaced in Xerox container and returned to vendor (no charge).

- Plastic Bottles & Recycled (No obvious vending source of plastic bottles

aluminum cans but bin was overflowing).

Annex: The Annex contains labs, test facilities, storage areas, offices and a cafeteria. The loading dock for this facility serves as the collection and sorting area for recycled materials. Materials and equipment were stored in every “nook and cranny” of this building. While the loading dock is used by the contractor to sort recyclable materials, the dumpster contained white paper, cardboard, loose fluorescent light bulbs, etc.

Waste Fate

- Aerosol Spray Cans (Electronic Lab) Placed in solid waste trash receptacles after use. (This problem waste has been eliminated since the assessment).

- Excess Equipment/Materials To Excess Property Warehouse.

- Glass/plastic/aluminum Recycled

- White Paper Recycled

Note: Multiple copiers were observed in this building. Much of the work observed was single sided. Two on 4th floor used purchased virgin paper from Office Depot (Purchased 5/27/99 and 7/26/99) with note to not use recycled paper.

Page 7

Annex Cafeteria

Waste Fate

Grease Sent to ERC Cafeteria

Glass, Plastic, Aluminum, Cardboard Recycled

Steel Cans/Excess Food Trashed

Administration Building:

This office building contained large quantities of paper document files. Significant quantities of single sided white paper were in recycling containers. A large portion were headers from printing jobs. Mixed paper was observed in multiple trashcans. Virtually all “junk mail” is trashed.

Building 4201:

The same observations made of other administrative areas apply to this building with the following additions:

-  3rd Floor copier had virgin paper stock. Approximately ½ ream of unused paper was in recycle bin.

-  Computer room had computer paper in trashcan.

NHEERL: This facility conducts toxicity studies using chemical analysis and test animals (rodents, rabbits, snakes, etc). Animal care is provided by a contractor.

Waste Fate

- Animal bedding (30K lbs./month) Incinerated at Building R

(Includes bedding from ERC)

- Lab Solvents (Acetone, Toluene, Waste is fuel blended for incineration. 6-7 55-gallon